Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

MAS IndiaMAS India
VS
Levi Strauss & Co.Levi Strauss & Co.
MAS India

MAS India

518-520 Thirupporur Kottamedu High Road, Nandhivaram Village, Guduvanchery 603 202, Chennai, IN

Last Update: 08/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.masholdings.com/
760/1000Fair

Embarking on a new chapter, MAS extends its legacy to empower communities in India. As India gears up to become the third largest economy by 2030, We are aiming to propel the country’s growth aspirations and become a significant contributor for textile and apparel indus...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:11
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Levi Strauss & Co.

Levi Strauss & Co.

1155 Battery St, San Francisco, US

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.levistrauss.com
750/1000Fair

You’re an original. So are we. We’re a company of people who like to forge our own path. We invented the blue jean in 1873, and we reinvented khaki pants in 1986. We pioneered labor and environmental guidelines in manufacturing. And we work to build sustainability int...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:17,893
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
MAS India

MAS India

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Levi Strauss & Co.

Levi Strauss & Co.

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for MAS India in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

Levi Strauss & Co. has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - MAS India (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MAS India cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Levi Strauss & Co. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Levi Strauss & Co. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
MAS India

MAS India

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Levi Strauss & Co.

Levi Strauss & Co.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MARHARLEV1786113277
🔒 Incident : Breach
LEV007072625

FAQ

Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between MAS India company and Levi Strauss & Co. company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between MAS India and Levi Strauss & Co., which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between MAS India and Levi Strauss & Co., which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - MAS India or Levi Strauss & Co. ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - MAS India or Levi Strauss & Co. ?
Between MAS India and Levi Strauss & Co., which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between MAS India and Levi Strauss & Co., which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
Mas-india vs Levi-strauss-&-co- - Cyber Risk Comparison & Security Rating | Rankiteo